posted Nov-26-2005 05:04 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by leitnerj:
Hi Tom- glad to see you're still reading this thread!

---

Congratulations on the great times.

IP: Logged

posted Nov-26-2005 05:08 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by tomrunsalot:
Congratulations on the great times.

---

thanks - I'm not there yet, but I've gone a long way towards
fixing my biggest running issues.

------------------
MyRunningLog

MyStuff

IP: Logged

posted Nov-26-2005 10:48 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by leitnerj:
Just thought I'd post my latest PR! On Thursday I ran the local
10k turkey trot prediction run and all felt great. So, Friday, I signed
up for the local Northern Central Trail Marathon. My plan was to
do 3:30-3:40, at least to get a PR. I ran it in 3:24:30,
a 23 minute PR from the PR I set in Baltimore just over a month
ago, and one week after my 2 hour PR in the JFK 50 miler! Race
report to follow soon, but here are my splits:

7:04/164, 7:24/163, 7:52/161, 7:46/162, 7:44/163,
7:42/163, 7:29/163, 7:47/163, 7:38/163, 7:46/164,
7:42/163, 7:49/165, 7:52/166, 7:35/167, 7:11/168,
7:25/169, 7:24/170, 7:46/169, 7:46/169, 7:47/169,
8:02/170, 8:14/167, 8:00/167, 8:39/165, 8:34/167,
7:47/171, 2:34(7:52/mi)/178

Finally, now even my marathon time is getting closer to
where it should be. And I felt great at the finish and I'm ready
to get back running tomorrow!

---

Great run, Jesse. It's amazing how even your heart rate stayed. It never got over 171 ave. I imagine the trail wasn't an even trail, and your pacing was really steady. You've had an incredible last two months: a triple-marathon, two marathons, and a 50 mile Ultra (I'm missing some races I'm sure)-- a fine display of endurance.

Congrats on your PR.

BTW, I'm reading "Ultra Marathon Man: Confessions of An All-Night Runner" an autobiography by Dean Karnazes. If you haven't read it alredy, check it out. It's very good, and very funny at times. I thought of you when he wrote about his first Western States 110 Mile Endurance Run, which starte near Lake Tahoe.

The scary part of the book is that it has me thinking of getting more extreme--just thinking. I think I'll just try to BQ at the Boston Marathon first.

--Jimmy

My Running World

IP: Logged

posted Nov-26-2005 10:57 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by jjwaverly42:
Great run, Jesse. It's amazing how even your heart rate stayed. It never got over 171 ave. I imagine the trail wasn't an even trail, and your pacing was really steady. You've had an incredible last two months: a triple-marathon, two marathons, and a 50 mile Ultra (I'm missing some races I'm sure)-- a fine display of endurance.

Congrats on your PR.

BTW, I'm reading "Ultra Marathon Man: Confessions of An All-Night Runner" an autobiography by Dean Karnazes. If you haven't read it alredy, check it out. It's very good, and very funny at times. I thought of you when he wrote about his first Western States 110 Mile Endurance Run, which starte near Lake Tahoe.

The scary part of the book is that it has me thinking of getting more extreme--just thinking. I think I'll just try to BQ at the Boston Marathon first.

--Jimmy

My Running World

---

thanks, Jimmy. It is funny, last week and today. My heart rate
just never climbed. The only thing that slowed me down at all
is a loss of desire to keep my legs moving at the same clip.
Both this week and last, I actually used my heart rate monitor
to help push me to keep my heart rate up by moving faster.
You're right - this was not really a trail run,
it just happened to be on the NCR trail (hard packed gravel and
dirt).

Yes, this stuff is addicting. When I saw the I qualified for Western
States 100, I mentioned it to a colleague who immediately said
"I'll crew for you" so I entered the lottery raffle for 2007. I'm still
yet to read Dean's book - I'm afraid it will push me further into
the addiction!

------------------
MyRunningLog

MyStuff

IP: Logged

posted Nov-26-2005 11:14 PM               

Along with this training, I'm changing my diet to include what is recommended by Maffetone and Mittleman (Dean Karnazes as well). I'm cutting out refined sugar and junk food, changing entirely to slowly digested carbs, and increasing protein (more fish and eggs), changing to good fats like olive and fish oil. I notice that I crave snacks a lot less eating this way, so we'll see how it works, along with working in a fat-burning zone for 14 weeks.

My hope is to get my weight down. I gained some weight (7 pounds) during training for Philly--both muscle and fat. Mostly fat. I ate too much crap. The weight didn't seem to slow me down, but I still feel Hippo-like (no offense to hippos--they can run up to 30 mph).

I'll keep ya posted on any progress.

--Jimmy

IP: Logged

posted Nov-26-2005 11:22 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by leitnerj:
thanks, Jimmy. It is funny, last week and today. My heart rate
just never climbed. The only thing that slowed me down at all
is a loss of desire to keep my legs moving at the same clip.
Both this week and last, I actually used my heart rate monitor
to help push me to keep my heart rate up by moving faster.
You're right - this was not really a trail run,
it just happened to be on the NCR trail (hard packed gravel and
dirt).

Yes, this stuff is addicting. When I saw the I qualified for Western
States 100, I mentioned it to a colleague who immediately said
"I'll crew for you" so I entered the lottery raffle for 2007. I'm still
yet to read Dean's book - I'm afraid it will push me further into
the addiction!

---

That's right, in the book, he said he needed 9:00:00 or better in a fifty miler, and you did that atthe JFK. You have to read the book. Especially if you are doing the Western States.

That seems like one grueling race.

I think you ae falling further into your "unlimitedness", not addiction.

Keep fallin'.

--Jimmy

My Running World

IP: Logged

posted Nov-27-2005 07:20 AM               

An interview with Dean Karnazes.

--Jimmy

My Running World

IP: Logged

posted Nov-27-2005 11:21 AM            

Jesse- Again, congratulations on your new PR! Must be that your ankle is fully recovered. I knew that a few days off would do wonders for you, and it did!

As far as my training, all I can see is that my pace is about one minute per mile faster than when I started a few months ago. Also, I was able to build up my mileage to a 24 mile long run without getting injured. I think that maybe this is because I am over 50 and female, plus I do not think that I was very aerobically fit when I started. I was an equestrian for years before giving up on horses about two years ago. Not too much aerobic training riding a horse. Maybe for the horse! I also trained with heavy weights.

The Las Vegas Marathon is next weekend and will be my first one. It will be interesting to see how it goes. I’m getting nervous about running it!

Good runs to all-Cathy

[This message has been edited by StealthRunner (edited Nov-27-2005).]

IP: Logged

posted Nov-27-2005 11:33 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by StealthRunner:
Hello everyone! I found an excellent article this morning that I wanted to share:
http://www.marathonguide.com/training/articles/MandBFuelOnFat.cfm

Jesse- Again, congratulations on your new PR! Must be that your ankle is fully recovered. I knew that a few days off would do wonders for you, and it did!

As far as my training, all I can see is that my pace is about one minute per mile faster than when I started a few months ago. Also, I was able to build up my mileage to a 24 mile long run without getting injured. I think that maybe this is because I am over 50 and female, plus I do not think that I was very aerobically fit when I started. I was an equestrian for years before giving up on horses about two years ago. Not too much aerobic training riding a horse. Maybe for the horse! I also trained with heavy weights.

The Las Vegas Marathon is next weekend and will be my first one. It will be interesting to see how it goes. I’m getting nervous about running it!

Good runs to all-Cathy

[This message has been edited by StealthRunner (edited Nov-27-2005).]

---

Thanks for posting that - sounds interesting. 1 min/mi faster is excellent
progress IMHO. And now to hear you talking about painless 24 mile
runs is outstanding - it seems like it wasn't long ago when you were
struggling to run pain-free runs of much shorter distances. You'll kick
some butt in Vegas and you'll feel great afterwards. Incidentally, I've
toyed with the notion of setting a target heart rate for races and I've
found that the best thing to do (if you decide to wear your HRM in the
race) is to wait until you are actually in the race, moving at a comfortable
pace before setting a target. Of course, since you haven't run a pile
of marathons (so you may not have a great idea of what a comfortable
pace is, other than the slow pace you've done in training), you'll use your
MAF pace as a guideline, knowing that you can comfortably run at
substantially higher heart rates. Best of luck and we look forward to
the RR!

------------------
MyRunningLog

MyStuff

IP: Logged

posted Nov-27-2005 12:56 PM            

IP: Logged

posted Nov-27-2005 02:32 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by StealthRunner:
Hello everyone! I found an excellent article this morning that I wanted to share:
http://www.marathonguide.com/training/articles/MandBFuelOnFat.cfm

Jesse- Again, congratulations on your new PR! Must be that your ankle is fully recovered. I knew that a few days off would do wonders for you, and it did!

As far as my training, all I can see is that my pace is about one minute per mile faster than when I started a few months ago. Also, I was able to build up my mileage to a 24 mile long run without getting injured. I think that maybe this is because I am over 50 and female, plus I do not think that I was very aerobically fit when I started. I was an equestrian for years before giving up on horses about two years ago. Not too much aerobic training riding a horse. Maybe for the horse! I also trained with heavy weights.

The Las Vegas Marathon is next weekend and will be my first one. It will be interesting to see how it goes. I’m getting nervous about running it!

Good runs to all-Cathy

[This message has been edited by StealthRunner (edited Nov-27-2005).]

---

Good article, Cathy. Somewhere in there was the statement "long, slow running will only teach you to run slowly for long periods." That's one of the misconceptions about heart-rate training in general that many people hold. The idea is to stay in a zone, not run slowly. You may be slow at first in that zone, but eventually you won't be.

Good luck at your first marathon. It's wise to just make finishing your goal in your first one. Start slower than your goal pace, and let your body warm into it. And don't lose all your cash in the slots at the waterstops (Any "entertainment" in Las Vegas is about getting your money into the slots--including road races). And for petessake be careful of wild burros and armadillos.

Look forward to your report.

--Jimmy

My Running World

IP: Logged

posted Nov-27-2005 03:04 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by jjwaverly42:
Good article, Cathy. Somewhere in there was the statement "long, slow running will only teach you to run slowly for long periods." That's one of the misconceptions about heart-rate training in general that many people hold. The idea is to stay in a zone, not run slowly. You may be slow at first in that zone, but eventually you won't be.

---

I just read the same thing that you did, Jimmy, and had the same
comment. This statement is used all over the place and can be
entirely misconstrued. It's so important to point out the context
in which this statement can be true:

1. One may be running very slowly, in the "neutral zone" between
aerobic and anaerobic zones, where, while slow, it's not at low enough
heart rate to receive aerobic benefit and not fast enough to push
the lactate threshold up. It is so difficult for many to conceive that
they might have to actually slow down further (at first) to get the aerobic
benefit. You and I (as well as many others on this board) have been
there.

2. Those who are going "slowly enough" (i.e., at low enough heart
rate) who do not pick up the pace (I call it "going with the flow")
as they are able at the same heart rate may get some good aerobic
benefit, but will not likely develop the aerobic speed that they would
likely be able to achieve from this approach.

It is really #2 above that this statement is warning about and, to be
honest, it's quite silly. For someone that really wants to improve
and speed up, he/she will naturally pick up the pace as the heart
rate allows. Run the same exact slow pace, day after day, and
you will run the same slow pace day after day. Duh. To really
see what's going on with this method, you can follow my running
log, starting back in late May when I started running again, and
just track my average pace up until today. There will be some peaks
and valleys in the earlier times because I would travel for a week to
a cooler location, or due to the duathlon and triathlon I did, and further
as the temps got hotter and the runs got longer, my pace became
slower, but for the most part, you can see the trend in pace. You
can certainly deduce a lot by looking at the end points. Running, biking,
and swimming. It is also critical to point out that the "high-end"
aerobic workouts ala Lydiard won't bring the most significant
benefit until you have developed your aerobic system thoroughly
at the low end. Jumping right into these will not train you to use
fat for fuel - your aerobic system must already be well-developed.
I think Mark Allen points this out the best and he has shown the best
results to prove it. Any time you dig into the background of
preparations, pre-season running, and so forth of Lydiard and
others with similar approaches, it starts out with a lot of slow, easy
miles.

------------------
MyRunningLog

MyStuff

IP: Logged

posted Nov-28-2005 08:27 AM               

On this particular course--a bike trail--there is one medium hill. I slowed down to make sure my HR didn't go over 141 (MAF). On the return part of the hill, I'm monitoring the time it takes me to get up the hill, keeping within MAF. I want to see how quick it gets over time and how it relates to flat land running HR. I'm calling this section Humble Pie Hill. To allow for adequate warm-up, I tried to get to the bottom of my zone (130 bpm) by the end of mile 3. Then keep an even pace for the rest of the run.

Below is what I did.
mile/time/ave HR
1) 12:07 107
2) 11:10 123 (hill)
3) 10:23 130
4) 12:01 132 (1.16 miles. pace 10:22)
5) 10:34 136
6) 11:22 135 (Humble Pie Hill 2:38 max HR 141)
7) 10:57 138

It was a comfy run.

I also started the 40:30:30 diet prescribed in Slow Burn and The Zone Diet. So far, my sugar cravings are almost nill, and I find it's a fairly good amount of food. Supposedly after a few weeks, I'll really feel a difference. We'll see.

Have a great running day!

--Jimmy

My Running World

IP: Logged

posted Nov-28-2005 09:32 AM            

Since I just started my HR training should I try to train on a flatter surface so I am running more or just do my usual route? I hope this works cause it would be awesome to run at that low HR and a faster pace. It does feel quite effortless.

IP: Logged

posted Nov-28-2005 10:01 AM               

Thanks much for all of your updates - every time I feel like I'm ready to throw in the towel I read another positive post on this thread and it gives me the impetus to keep on going.

------------------
Sue

IP: Logged

posted Nov-28-2005 12:40 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by jackster:

Since I just started my HR training should I try to train on a flatter surface so I am running more or just do my usual route? I hope this works cause it would be awesome to run at that low HR and a faster pace. It does feel quite effortless.

---

Break it up. That's what I do. I have a flattish course, and a rolling hills course. Makes for some variety.

--Jimmy

My Running World

IP: Logged

posted Nov-28-2005 01:03 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by SueT48:
I just completed week 6 of this experiment, and I am beginning to show some positive progress. I don't have to walk or jog at a walking pace anymore which is a vast improvement for me. It is taking longer and more effort to get up to my target heart rate, and I can drive my heart rate down significantly with deep breathing (is this cheating?). I'm seeking advice from the voices of experience on this thread. I signed up for a January half marathon. I did this long before I started heart rate training. I have 6 weeks until the marathon. Would you suggest a) sticking strictly to the slow recovery run pace or b) adding a session or two of speedwork along with the usual slow recovery runs. Should I just have faith that the speed will be there when I need it? I'm not looking at this half marathon for a PR, but I don't want to embarass myself either.

Thanks much for all of your updates - every time I feel like I'm ready to throw in the towel I read another positive post on this thread and it gives me the impetus to keep on going.

---

Have you ever run a half-marathon before?
I ask because if this is your first try at one, you want to just try to finish.
If you go in with the mindset that you have to finish fast, you might start out too fast.

That being said, your main goal seems to be building endurance. Have you run any 13 milers or above yet? That should be your main focus. Getting the miles in. Speedwork won't hurt you (if done sparingly), but it might take away from your main focus at this point--endurance.

If you are an experienced racer and half-marathoner, and you can already run 13 miles easily, then a few LT runs or V02max sessions in the final 4 weeks will brighten your legs a bit.

Good luck.

--Jimmy

My Running World

IP: Logged

posted Nov-28-2005 02:44 PM               

I hadn't checked this thread in a while. Whew! Lotsa water under the bridge.

It seems to me that your experiment of one has been a resounding success, a font of discovery. I'm both attracted by, and leery of, spiritual language, but it's clear that you've found your path, as they say, and you're walking it openly, honestly, and passionately, and that's pretty much all we can do in this life.

If nothing else, you've proved that Maffetone training (which seems to an old hand like me a version of Joe Henderson's LSD philosophy w/Van Aaken and Hadd lurking nearby) is a superb way of training for pure endurance events--which is surely what your three-marathons-in-a-weekend exploit deserves to be called. The idea that you could cross the line on that third day and feel yourself beginning to recover almost immediately--rather than, say, falling to pieces--says worlds about the rightness of your project. So, too, does that fact that you even FELT like running a full marathon the following weekend, much less actually turning in a creditable performance.

As somebody who bridles at all orthodoxies but is always willing to learn something new from the first-person witness of people who've made real-world experiments, I'm intrigued by your project. I continue to feel that low-heart-rate training is more beneficial for runners who are still coming into the sport--those who, like yourself, only have a couple of years under their belts, runners who are in the weight-losing process, and so forth. In other words, people who have a lot of room for increasing their aerobic endurance--more room than, say, a 23-year-old with eight years of HS and collegiate cross-country and track behind them.

In any case, if I'm right about what I say above--and you may certainly disagree, although the paucity of top competitive runners who adhere to a strict Maffetone plan will argue against you--then your trial has convinced me that Maffetone training has several other important applicatons and/or things to teach us:

1) ULTRAMARATHONING. It's hard for me to imagine a better way for a first-time ultramarathoner to get into shape than Maffetone. Certainly it will be hard for anybody to claim that you could have better-trained yourself for your recent feats of endurance than with the Maffetone system.

2) THE RUNNING EXPERIENCE. One clear-cut benefit of Maffetone training for many who've contributed here, if I'm not wrong, is that a kind of low-stress sweetness (if I may use that word) has become a part of their daily running experience. The importance of this shouldn't be underestimated--particularly by those sneerers who've never disciplined themselves to slow down enough to actually experience it. An analogy might be made between the "slow food" movement--based in Italy, I believe--and Maffetone training. Slow down a little and enjoy life a lot more! Those such as yourself who stake the value of Maffetone training on pace-and-race-time improvements might want to place slightly more stress on this second benefit. You'll be sneered at by the Letsrun racers, of course, but they sneer at everything--and give up running in their mid-20s when they find out they can't make it pay. You've convinced me that I should occasionally make it a point to experiment with slower-than-usual paces on my long runs--for the sheer pleasure of it.

Now, my critique: as far as I can tell, Maffetone training doesn't care about any of the following things:

*) specific muscle strength--in the quads, calves, ankles--of the sort developed by hill repeats; the sort of muscle strength that helps give you a long and powerful stride and helps you sustain that stride;

*) neuromuscular coordination, of the sort developed and sustained by, say, twice-weekly alactic strides; the sort of coordination required, surely, to maximize success at race-distances from 10K on down, but particularly in the 5K

*) stroke volume, directly coorelated with V02max, which, as I understand it, is best insured by once-weekly sessions of, say, three-minute hill repeats at 3-5K effort.

All three of these things are much less important at the marathon distance and beyond than they are at shorter race distances, although I would argue that specific muscular strength--of a sort developed, in my experience, by hill repeats but not by simple aerobic mileage in ANY amoung--is crucial to marathoning success.

Still, these three things are much less to runners who have relatively underdeveloped aerobic profiles than they are to more weathered runners.

I could say that I suspect you'll slowly come to agree with me. But who knows? You may just end up turning into a champion ultramarathoner, with all of your upper-body work giving you a staying power than lesser runners don't have. I'm quite sure I'll continue to enjoy your progress. And I will definitely think about you when I take a very slow long run one of these winter days.......

[This message has been edited by KudzuRunner (edited Nov-28-2005).]

IP: Logged

posted Nov-28-2005 06:47 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by jackster:
So far all of my HR training has been on the TM so I made a point to get outside over the holiday weeknd. I went out Thursday. It was in the teen and 20-25 mile hr winds. So everytime a gust came I was walking. I think I did 3 miles in 32 or 33 min. Dont remember. Then Saturday I did 6 miles. Again pretty slowly. my route is pretty hilly and I noticed I ended up walking most of the hills at least half way. I felt like I walked more then ran. I did it 71 mins. It does suck to run that slow or walk but I am going to stick with it. I did clock my splits but I can't figure out how to check them. but I know they got progressivly slower, which is correct.

Since I just started my HR training should I try to train on a flatter surface so I am running more or just do my usual route? I hope this works cause it would be awesome to run at that low HR and a faster pace. It does feel quite effortless.

---

I think it will help initially, at least to cut down on frustration, to try
to stay on routes as flat as possible. However, once you get to
a reasonable pace, you do want to start hitting the hills, because
one of the significant benefits and milestones that you will acquire
is the ability to keep yourself from overdoing it on the hills and
recover quickly. It's amazing what a benefit it is.

------------------
MyRunningLog

MyStuff

IP: Logged

posted Nov-28-2005 06:52 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by SueT48:
I just completed week 6 of this experiment, and I am beginning to show some positive progress. I don't have to walk or jog at a walking pace anymore which is a vast improvement for me. It is taking longer and more effort to get up to my target heart rate, and I can drive my heart rate down significantly with deep breathing (is this cheating?). I'm seeking advice from the voices of experience on this thread. I signed up for a January half marathon. I did this long before I started heart rate training. I have 6 weeks until the marathon. Would you suggest a) sticking strictly to the slow recovery run pace or b) adding a session or two of speedwork along with the usual slow recovery runs. Should I just have faith that the speed will be there when I need it? I'm not looking at this half marathon for a PR, but I don't want to embarass myself either.

Thanks much for all of your updates - every time I feel like I'm ready to throw in the towel I read another positive post on this thread and it gives me the impetus to keep on going.

---

That's excellent that you're seeing some progress and things are
moving along. If you are able to somehow keep things under control
by breathing techniques, that's fantastic, certainly not cheating, and
something I have never been able to do ! As far as speedwork goes,
you've basically started this program smack in the middle of your
race training, so you'll have to decide which is more important -
race performance or long-term basebuilding strategy. My feeling
on speedwork in all cases is that you don't want to do it, just to
do it, without any specific goals - you need specific target paces
or zones you want to run in for specific distances and you need
to have an idea of what you are trying to accomplish. If you use
McMillan's running table, that can be a good guideline. Good luck
in either case!

------------------
MyRunningLog

MyStuff

IP: Logged

posted Nov-28-2005 07:06 PM               

I think you're about right on on all points. A couple of details I should
point out. First, one difference between this and Henderson is that
I can't really call this a "slow-running" regimen, except in the beginning
and in certain cases, such as unusually warm temps, high resting
heart rate, etc., because it is key to "pick up the pace" as you are
able to at the low heart rates. So, at first, you will likely be going
horrendously slowly (to the point of endless frustration), after a
few months, there's a good chance you'll be going faster in training
(now at very low level of effort) than you were before you started this.
For example, at the peak of my aerobic conditioning, before I started
doing a lot of races, I was up to 7:15-7:30/mile on the treadmill and
about 8/mile outside at a 140 heart rate. Both were a lot faster than
I ever ran in training other than speedwork and tempo runs. The
second thing to mention is that just before my injury I had in February,
I had a professional vo2max test done which gave me 54.3, while
I had another performed about a month ago at 62.5 - with no speed
work or any type of "vo2max" workouts whatsoever in between.

As far as the new runner getting most benefits, I think that's mostly
right, but probably more of the "2-5 year" runner, but not the brand
new runners who have not yet developed core speed. That's not
to say that there aren't a lot of veteran runners who may not have
strong aerobic conditioning who may benefit significantly. My feeling,
and the last element of my experiment, is that you can tell if you've
done all you can (for the moment) with basebuilding if your short
distance times (and I'll go as short as a one mile race) project out
well to the long distance times (marathon) using respected pace
predictors, such as McMillan's.

------------------
MyRunningLog

MyStuff

IP: Logged

posted Nov-28-2005 11:59 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by KudzuRunner:
Jesse:

I hadn't checked this thread in a while. Whew! Lotsa water under the bridge.

It seems to me that your experiment of one has been a resounding success, a font of discovery. I'm both attracted by, and leery of, spiritual language, but it's clear that you've found your path, as they say, and you're walking it openly, honestly, and passionately, and that's pretty much all we can do in this life.

If nothing else, you've proved that Maffetone training (which seems to an old hand like me a version of Joe Henderson's LSD philosophy w/Van Aaken and Hadd lurking nearby) is a superb way of training for pure endurance events--which is surely what your three-marathons-in-a-weekend exploit deserves to be called. The idea that you could cross the line on that third day and feel yourself beginning to recover almost immediately--rather than, say, falling to pieces--says worlds about the rightness of your project. So, too, does that fact that you even FELT like running a full marathon the following weekend, much less actually turning in a creditable performance.

As somebody who bridles at all orthodoxies but is always willing to learn something new from the first-person witness of people who've made real-world experiments, I'm intrigued by your project. I continue to feel that low-heart-rate training is more beneficial for runners who are still coming into the sport--those who, like yourself, only have a couple of years under their belts, runners who are in the weight-losing process, and so forth. In other words, people who have a lot of room for increasing their aerobic endurance--more room than, say, a 23-year-old with eight years of HS and collegiate cross-country and track behind them.

In any case, if I'm right about what I say above--and you may certainly disagree, although the paucity of top competitive runners who adhere to a strict Maffetone plan will argue against you--then your trial has convinced me that Maffetone training has several other important applicatons and/or things to teach us:

1) ULTRAMARATHONING. It's hard for me to imagine a better way for a first-time ultramarathoner to get into shape than Maffetone. Certainly it will be hard for anybody to claim that you could have better-trained yourself for your recent feats of endurance than with the Maffetone system.

2) THE RUNNING EXPERIENCE. One clear-cut benefit of Maffetone training for many who've contributed here, if I'm not wrong, is that a kind of low-stress sweetness (if I may use that word) has become a part of their daily running experience. The importance of this shouldn't be underestimated--particularly by those sneerers who've never disciplined themselves to slow down enough to actually experience it. An analogy might be made between the "slow food" movement--based in Italy, I believe--and Maffetone training. Slow down a little and enjoy life a lot more! Those such as yourself who stake the value of Maffetone training on pace-and-race-time improvements might want to place slightly more stress on this second benefit. You'll be sneered at by the Letsrun racers, of course, but they sneer at everything--and give up running in their mid-20s when they find out they can't make it pay. You've convinced me that I should occasionally make it a point to experiment with slower-than-usual paces on my long runs--for the sheer pleasure of it.

Now, my critique: as far as I can tell, Maffetone training doesn't care about any of the following things:

*) specific muscle strength--in the quads, calves, ankles--of the sort developed by hill repeats; the sort of muscle strength that helps give you a long and powerful stride and helps you sustain that stride;

*) neuromuscular coordination, of the sort developed and sustained by, say, twice-weekly alactic strides; the sort of coordination required, surely, to maximize success at race-distances from 10K on down, but particularly in the 5K

*) stroke volume, directly coorelated with V02max, which, as I understand it, is best insured by once-weekly sessions of, say, three-minute hill repeats at 3-5K effort.

All three of these things are much less important at the marathon distance and beyond than they are at shorter race distances, although I would argue that specific muscular strength--of a sort developed, in my experience, by hill repeats but not by simple aerobic mileage in ANY amoung--is crucial to marathoning success.

Still, these three things are much less to runners who have relatively underdeveloped aerobic profiles than they are to more weathered runners.

I could say that I suspect you'll slowly come to agree with me. But who knows? You may just end up turning into a champion ultramarathoner, with all of your upper-body work giving you a staying power than lesser runners don't have. I'm quite sure I'll continue to enjoy your progress. And I will definitely think about you when I take a very slow long run one of these winter days.......

[This message has been edited by KudzuRunner (edited Nov-28-2005).]

---

Hey Kudzu,

I ain't Jesse--yet, but I'm trying- but I thought I'd reply to your critique anyway. The one flaw in it is that you think Maffetone is all slow running and low HR. Maffetone himself only prescribes the low HR until you plateau, then he suggests adding anaerobic workouts, then when you plateau with that, go back to exclusively low HR base training. A cycle if you will.

You are making an attempt to put all this into a box marked "just for relative beginners." As a relative beginner, I believe that aerobic heart-rate training is great for beginners. It's helped me to achieve great progress in all race times across the board. I can't really say, except for writings and experiences by Mark Allen, maffetone, and Stu Mittleman whether or not it will work for a longtime runner. I am not one yet.

The other misconception about this training in general is that it is slow running or "long slow distance." It is a low HR, and some of us run long, but the slowness is temporary. This is actually my first experience at going totally MAFFY. Though my first experiments with heart-rate training in Spring 2004 were very close to my current MAF of 141 bpm. My zones during that period wre 126-135 and 145-152 (basically the range Pfitzinger gives me for recovery). My aerobic ceiling is somewhere around 164-170. So all the miles were low HR, and my times got faster--not just training paces, but all races from 5k to half-marathon.

My motto is "find out thru experimentation." I'm looking at the next 16 weeks as another journey to see what happens if...

My last two experiments was still mostly aerobic (90% of all training miles were aerobic including a 10-week base period at the begining of 2005. Less than 1% was v02max miles. The majority of "fast" miles were marathon tempo runs and LT, totalling 9%). It all ended up in a pretty good display of endurance and speed (for me) at Philly Marathon last week for a 3:28 BQ (I'm giving myself two weeks to brag about Philly--then I'm cuting me off!).

At the very least, I'm sure that I will come out on the other end of the Maffetone base building with an even greater aerobic base, uninjured, and ready to add some LT, tempo, and V02max runs down the stretch before the Boston Marathon.

Try it for a base building period. What have you got to lose? (It's not a cult--really--yet--when Jesse asks me to call him The High Priest of The Maffetone Club, I'm running the other way! With my HRM on of course).

Keep going!

--Jimmy

My Running World

IP: Logged

posted Nov-29-2005 09:13 AM               

Well, I certainly can't argue with that sort of V02max improvement (Jesse) or marathon (Jimmy). Nor can I argue with you setting me straight about what distinguishes M'tone training from LSD; my bad, and thanks.

I still think there's much to be gained from what hills do for a runner's specific muscular strength. I haven't figured out the right regimen for myself, but I've sometimes made remarkable leaps forward after adding, say, 3 x 1:30 hard hills twice a week for two weeks, after the base has been developed. Suddenly, a few days later, I'm floating effortlessly across the ground. More mysteries here. Perhaps that's my path to walk.

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that I'd like to try this Maffetone thing over the winter. I want the most succinct description of the Maffetone regimen--something I can easily follow, something geared for maximum clarity, utility, and applicability. Where in this long thread can I find that? Obviously I went first to Dr. Maffetone's webpage, which you (Jesse) hyperlinked in your very first post. It laid the basic system out, sure enough, but I suspect that after your long experiment, you could do a much better job. Have you indeed done that, somewhere within this endless thread? If so, please--for the sake of drawing in new recruits like me--cut and paste it here, or somewhere else easily findable. Perhaps it's worth starting a new thread: "Maffetone made easy."

And if you haven't yet laid out the M'tone system in a succinct way, please do! I'm willing to be convinced. I'm a pretty skilled self-trainer (w/a 2:53 marathon back in '83, and corresponding times down to a 5:02 mile), but I'm willing to learn something new, and enough of a nerd to follow the plan.

IP: Logged

posted Nov-29-2005 11:48 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by ultrasteve:
Whoa....how'd it get here twice????

---

Thread hog!
You can always go to the edit post icon and erase the extra post.
Make sure you back up what you wrote before you try it, just in case.

--JJ

IP: Logged

posted Nov-29-2005 12:13 PM               

MAF Test #1 11/29/05
Mile/time/aveHR
1) 9:25 142
2) 9:42 142
3) 10:04 142
4) 10:33 142

total time: 39:44 ave speed: 9:56
Time difference from 1st to last mile: 1:08 or 12.04% decline

--Jimmy

My Running World

[This message has been edited by jjwaverly42 (edited Nov-29-2005).]

IP: Logged